This morning’s WaPo/Schar school poll about Gov. Abigail Spanberger – not great results, for sure – is just one survey, of course, so there’s no need to freak out about it. On the other hand, I wouldn’t just write it off as an “outlier” by the “Bezos Post” (which sucks, obviously, but that doesn’t mean this poll by the Schar School – which has been solid in the past – is fatally flawed) – or anything; instead, I’d take it seriously and see if we can learn anything from it. I’ve got a few thoughts about the poll, but first, here are the main findings.
- First off, I don’t think this is about generic “partisanship,” as that’s nothing new, so why would this particular poll suddenly start showing it? Also, note that in New Jersey, where Abigail Spanberger’s close friend (and very similar politician in terms of messaging) Mikie Sherrill was at 58%-34% (+24 points) in a recent poll, while Spanberger’s at just +1 point in this new WaPo/Schar School poll. So unless you think that there’s “partisanship” in New Jersey but not in Virginia, which obviously would be an absurd assumption, there’s no reason to think that the results of the WaPo/Schar poll result mainly, or even substantially, from generic “partisanship.”
- As for whether the redistricting referendum could be driving down Spanberger’s approval ratings, I mean…maybe, except that in this same poll, the redistricting referendum leads by 9 points among registered voters and 5 points among likely voters – in both cases, running ahead of Spanberger’s net +1 approval rating (by 8 points and 4 points, respectively). So it’s hard for me to see how the redistricting referendum could be dragging Spanberger’s approval rating down, when the redistricting referendum polls HIGHER than Spanberger does.
- I’d argue that there’s been a massive, concerted campaign by Republicans since Spanberger was inaugurated in early January to really go after her, hurt her approval ratings, basically bring her down to earth. And, unfortunately, it seems to have worked to an extent. Mostly, it’s been Republicans claiming that Spanberger was raising a gazillion taxes, which is simply flat-out false; in fact, there’s no sign that she’ll be raising any taxes at all (note: ditching some of the tax BREAKS for data centers, if that happens, isn’t really a “tax increase,” but one could at least try to argue that). Unfortunately, though, that narrative – Spanberger was RAISING YOUR TAXES – was repeated a gazillion times on social media, as well as on right-wing media and even in the “mainstream” media, with basically Z-E-R-O pushback from Spanberger’s communications folks, the Democratic Party of Virginia, etc., for weeks/months on end. And yes, that’s almost certainly had an impact on Spanberger’s approval rating – a negative one. Lesson: don’t let Republican lies go unanswered; hit back immediately, hard, and relentlessly, by presenting the FACTS.
- On a related note, it probably would be popular if Spanberger got on board with raising taxes on the super-rich, as that polls VERY high – and has done so for a long time. Instead, Spanberger apparently did NOT support bills introduced in the 2025 VA General Assembly to raise taxes on the wealthy (but didn’t publicly/vocally oppose them either), and those bills were all killed. So in the end, perhaps Spanberger gets the worst of all worlds here: a) doesn’t get the revenues from raising taxes on the wealthy; b) doesn’t get the approval from raising taxes on the wealthy; c) gets (100% falsely) called a far-left-radical/commie/etc. by Republicans anyway.
- On “affordability,” the numbers in this poll aren’t particularly encouraging, but the fact is – as Mark Rozell (who I don’t usually agree with) points out in the WaPo story – “Affordability is a great campaign theme, but almost an impossible governing one given the limited tools that a governor has to affect prices…The public may like the particulars of some of her proposals, but as long as the overall environment on affordability remains unchanged, there is inevitable disappointment.” Which makes me wonder, is this a case of “overpromise and then under-deliver?” Because the fact is, there’s not much a governor can realistically do about inflation, which is overwhelmingly a national and even international phenomenon. And to the extent a governor *could* do something, would those measures (e.g., on expanding housing supply, let’s just say there was legislation to ditch exclusionary single-family zoning statewide) even be able to pass the General Assembly? Or, to spend a lot of money to help the working class and middle class (via tax cuts, subsidies, whatever), where would that money come from if tax hikes for the wealthy (and for big corporations) are taken off the table?
Anyway, those are just a few thoughts on this morning’s WaPo/Schar poll release. What do you think?
